Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add stefan-stepzero/shipkit --skill shipkit-review-shippinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/stefan-stepzero/shipkitWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/stefan-stepzero/shipkit/shipkit-review-shipping)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/stefan-stepzero/shipkit/shipkit-review-shipping"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/stefan-stepzero/shipkit/shipkit-review-shipping.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00027 | $0.07941 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.03971 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.01588 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00794 |
Grade A, and why
shipkit-review-shipping scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 6d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 770 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
shipkit-review-shipping
Review-only verification — Claude reviews your work across 12 quality dimensions and reports findings with evidence. You decide what to fix.
Report, don't fix. Scans changes, classifies findings by severity, and presents a structured report. The reviewer never modifies code.
When to Invoke
/verify— review all recent changes/verify <feature>— focus on specific area- "Check my work", "Am I ready to commit?"
For deeper review: If user asks for "deep check", "thorough review", or "really scrutinize this" → see Deeper Review Option below.
Arguments
If $ARGUMENTS is provided (e.g. /shipkit-review-shipping auth module), use it as the explicit verification scope. Skip scope detection and treat it as the answer to "What should I verify?".
If $ARGUMENTS is empty, proceed normally with automatic scope detection (git diff, session context).
Process
Completion Tracking
After detecting scope, create tasks:
TaskCreate: "Pre-scan: Quick pass across 12 dimensions"TaskCreate: "Pattern ripple: Expand scope to affected files"TaskCreate: "Deep review: All 12 dimensions with evidence"TaskCreate: "Write verification-report.json"
TaskUpdate each task to in_progress when starting it, completed when done. Track dimension progress: "Reviewing dimension {N}/12: {name}". The pre-scan is NOT the final report — the deep review (Step 3) must follow. Do NOT present findings until verification-report.json is written to disk.
Step 1: Detect Scope
Determine what to verify:
# Get uncommitted changes
git diff --name-only HEAD
# If nothing uncommitted, check recent commits
git diff --name-only HEAD~3..HEAD
Also consider: What did Claude work on this session?
If unclear, ask: "What should I verify?"
Step 1.1: Quick Pre-Scan (Before Loop)
Run a lightweight first pass across the 12 dimensions on the changed files only (no pattern ripple yet). This is a fast scan to surface the landscape of findings.
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 6d ago First seen · 770 lines · 27 tokens per session scan A 796da196f26b
shipkit-review-shipping is a skill published in the GitHub repository stefan-stepzero/shipkit (1 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 27 tokens to every session and 7,941 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
peer-review
Use when Claude completes a spec or code implementation and needs independent review, or when the user invokes /peer-review. Triggers automatically after spec writing or code completion for production projects. Only bypass when user explicitly opts out.
review-implementing
Process and implement code review feedback systematically. Use when user provides reviewer comments, PR feedback, code review notes, or asks to implement suggestions from reviews.
code-auditor
Performs comprehensive codebase analysis covering architecture, code quality, security, performance, testing, and maintainability. Use when user wants to audit code quality, identify technical debt, find security issues, assess test coverage, or get a codebase health check.
address-pr-feedback
Comprehensively addresses PR feedback by fetching all comments, deploying parallel agents for critical analysis of each suggestion, making implementation decisions, then systematically implementing fixes with incremental commits and browser validation. Use when you need to systematically process and implement all PR…
post-pr-for-review
Generates a contextual Slack message for posting a PR to the team's review channel. Pulls context from PR diff, Linear ticket, session conversation, and related PRs to write a concise, informative review request. Use when sharing a PR for review, posting to the review channel, or preparing a review request message.
address-pr-comments
Fetches unresolved PR comments, categorizes them (must-fix, suggestion, question, nit), proposes fixes or replies for each, and executes approved actions. Use when addressing PR review feedback or when someone requests changes on your PR.